As the deadline for ordering a bond election nears, trustees met to discuss the specific propositions they want to put forward to voters on the May ballot.

Staff presented a final list of potential bond projects — including one addition — during a special workshop meeting of the Garland ISD Board of Trustees Tuesday, Jan. 24. If finalized, the projects will likely appear on the ballot for the May 6 election.

Chief Financial Officer Brent Ringo said that the final package was presented to be fiscally responsible based on the district’s potential bonding capacity, adding that around $457 million worth of projects were cut to keep the figure from becoming too large. The district’s credit rating is also “AAA,” which is the highest possible tier, typically correlating with more favorable interest rates.

The total package recommended by the Citizen’s Bond Steering Committee is estimated to be around $1.19 billion; however, district staff proposed adding an additional elementary school to Proposition A that would increase the overall bond offering. The district is also planning to use a staff augmentation model that would add the assistance of contractors working under district employees to manage the fulfillment of the bond.

The cost for the staff augmentation model would be around $17.8 million over the projected five-year window to deliver all bond projects. Trustees also approved moving forward with a 25-year term on the bonds sold.

The initial amount for Proposition A is nearly $1.02 billion without accounting for the potential addition of a fourth elementary school campus. To determine the projects included, staff at all levels of the district were included to gather input for which projects should be prioritized. 

As presented, the projects would impact elementary, secondary and high school campuses districtwide while also constructing several district facilities, including a new transportation hub, network operation center and agricultural facilities.

Draft language in the bond will also give Garland ISD flexibility to complete other necessary facility projects if it saves money on others. 

“If it is solely on the projects approved and we get to the end, it is prohibited to use those dollars for any other projects if it is not loosely defined,” Ringo said. “This is allowable within the statute and the language, and allows us to access the dollars for other projects.”

For the full story, see the Feb. 2 issue of The Sachse News.